Published in

De Gruyter, Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 11(59), p. 1844-1851, 2021

DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2021-0643

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Distribution of HOMA-IR in a population-based cohort and proposal for reference intervals

Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher
Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher

Full text: Unavailable

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Published version: archiving restricted
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Abstract Objectives Insulin resistance (IR) is a hallmark of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). The homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) provides an estimate for IR from fasting glucose and insulin serum concentrations. The aim of this study was to obtain a reference interval for HOMA-IR for a specific insulin immunoassay. Methods The Gutenberg Health Study (GHS) is a population-based, prospective, single-center cohort study in Germany with 15,030 participants aged 35–74 years. Fasting glucose, insulin, and C-peptide were available in 10,340 participants. HOMA-IR was calculated in this group and three reference subgroups with increasingly more stringent inclusion criteria. Age- and sex-dependent distributions of HOMA-IR and reference intervals were obtained. In a substudy three insulin assays were compared and HOMA-IR estimated for each assay. Results Among the 10,340 participants analyzed there were 6,590 non-diabetic, 2,901 prediabetic, and 849 diabetic individuals. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) HOMA-IR was 1.54 (1.13/2.19), 2.00 (1.39/2.99), and 4.00 (2.52/6.51), respectively. The most stringently selected reference group consisted of 1,065 persons. Median (IQR) HOMA-IR was 1.09 (0.85/1.42) with no significant difference between men and women. The 97.5th percentile was 2.35. There was a non-significant trend towards higher values with older age. Comparison of three immunoassays for insulin showed an unsatisfactory correlation among the assays and systematic differences in calculated HOMA-IR. Conclusions We present HOMA-IR reference intervals for adults derived by more or less stringent selection criteria for the reference cohort. In addition we show that assay specific reference intervals for HOMA-IR are required.